Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to a delay of 2 years and 9 months. The delay was attributed to the Covid-19 pandemic and the search for a new tax consultant. The assessee faced issues with CPC processing of their return related to MAT calculations.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) citing reasonable cause due to the pandemic and difficulties in finding a tax consultant. The issue regarding the technical defect in CPC processing was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned and if there was a technical defect in the CPC processing of the return.
Sections Cited
143(1), 115JB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Assessment Year : 2018-19 Adroit Agri Trade Private Vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Nashik. Limited, 2063A, S-Wing, Akshar Business Park, Plot 03, Sec. 25, Vashi, Navi Mumbai, Sanpada S.O., New Mumbai, Thane- 400705. PAN : AAICA5327P Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Piyush Bafna Revenue by : Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar Date of hearing : 11.03.2025 Date of pronouncement : 25.03.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER MANISH BORAD, AM:
This appeal filed at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Addl/JCIT(A)-3, Ahmedabad [Ld. CIT(A)’] dated 10.07.2024 which is arising out of the assessment order u/s 143(1) of the Act for Assessment Year 2018-19 framed on 02.07.2019 by the CPC, Bangalore.
Though the assessee raised six grounds of appeal but the major grievance is that Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the 2 years 9 months in filing of the appeal before Ld. CIT(A).
3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to the contents of the condonation application submitted that major delay was on account of Covid-19 restriction and the remaining delay was on account of search for tax consultant to file the appeal. He therefore prayed that the delay pleased be condoned with a direction to Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal on merits.
4. On the other hand, Ld. DR supported the order of Ld. CIT(A) and opposed to the request of condonation of delay in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A).
We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Admittedly, the assessee is a private limited company and the order u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act was passed on 02.07.2019. Certain prima-facie adjustments was made by the CPC which mainly were made under the deemed total income u/s 115JB of the Act. The assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) but the same was delayed by 2 years and 9 months. We have gone through the application filed by the assessee before Ld. CIT(A) praying for condonation of delay and find that the tax consultant who was hired by the assessee to file the income tax return, was not well versed Ld. CIT(A). By the time, the assessee company could look for new tax consultant for filing the appeal, the country was lockdown due to Covid-19 pandemic from March, 2020 till March, 2022 and immediately, after lifting of Covid-19 restriction, the assessee filed the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) on 16.05.2022. We find that the assessee has reasonable cause preventing it from filing the appeal in time before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, we condone the delay in filing of appeal before Ld. CIT(A).
So far as merits of the case are concerned, Ld. Counsel for the assessee demonstrated before us that there are some technical defects in processing of return by CPC and also took us to Schedule MAT where the profit after tax as shown in Profit & Loss Account is Rs. -3,15,480/-. Now in the last column of the Schedule MAT i.e. at the end where the total addition of column no.5a to 5n is mentioned Rs.5,81,761/- but the book profit calculated in column no.7 is total of column no.4 + column no.5a to 5n. Now column no.6 amounting is Nil. So what remains is Rs. -3,15,480/- + Rs.5,81,761/- and resultant figure is Rs.2,66,281/- and this is the figure which the assessee has disclosed in the return. But surprisingly in the CPC processing at serial no.7 the figure of total